HDV --> SD DVD Workflow?

[hhansard]

Dont want to sound stupid or naive, but probably going to come across that way

I have shot [underwater] dv for years, and moved to hdv in 06. Since I have an end-to-end blu-ray setup with a broadcast scalier, my hdv footage looks great at home.

I was asked to take some of my hdv footage and burn an sd dvd for distribution. I took an edit of 1440x1080 and exported in PP-CS3 [movie] [Sorenson] as 720x480dv, no recompression highest quality (26G for a 30minute vid), etc, etc.. and imported it into a new PP3 d1 project. Burned the DVD again highest quality

I looked at the results on an sd 4:3 monitor terrible much worse then my old native dv footage. I expected to loose quality, but assumed that the scaling algorithm would smooth, and I would end-up with something acceptable --- but it does not look like it it looks like pixels are just dropped with no interpellation at all. I mean if you never saw the original footage, you might let it pass, but having seen the original footage, you can tell that the compression has killed it. I know that this is like a 2 (maybe 3) generation dupe, but I have access to the original pixels and would have assumed with minimal recompression/expansion the results would be as good as 1gen dv but I cant seem to get there

Can anyone point me to a good workflow [or some settings] to take hdv footage and cut a decent quality sd dvd using the production suite??

Thanks in advance,

Hugh

[_bchil_]

So, it seems that the problem lies with the HDV format itself, and not PPro CS3? I am not sure why people would expect true HD quality ($250,000 minimum investment) out of a system that they built for less than $20,000... I guess in today's age, where everyone is a video editor - that is still what separates the men from the boys, so to speak.

Let's face it, you are shooting on HDV - a PROSUMER format. Ok for B-roll, but will never be true HD (such as the Sony CineAlta 900/R) I do not own this camera, but I sub-rent them and provide to the end-client for $1500/day. There is a reason that this camera is $1500 a day. It is amazing. Do not expect the same results, no matter what you do in post, from a camera (or should I say camcorder) that costs $4000 to OWN, not rent...

Still, this is disheartening. I, like everyone else, want to have my cake and eat it too. It sucks that you have to spend money to get quality. In an ideal world, the client would understand this, instead of expecting professional quality on a consumer budget.

Fo what it's worth, I was watching "The Dog Whisperer" the other day and several times I saw a Sony Z1U on-screen. This may have been just b-roll or maybe that is all they use. Hard to tell with the crappy, compressed Cox cable "HD" feed I get.

-BChil

[Jim_Simon]

>Let's face it, you are shooting on HDV - a PROSUMER format.

I'd put it one step down from that into consumer even.

[_hconant_]

My "consumer" camcorder Sony HDR-HC7 (I don't think it even rates prosumer status despite the $1200 price) doesn't seem to have an HDV > SD setting. And PP (another $800) will only allow recorded HD to be captured as such. So, I guess that is the end of that. But I am not clear as to why the hoop dee doo about the prosumer camera vs pro camera. I spent a LONG time reading everything that I could about the entire HD subject. It was represented by all the Adobe literature that input in HD could be output to many different formats. Nothing about such degredation that it was unuseable, for any practical purpose. I wasn't trying to be a pro videographer, just a higher end amature. I would have purchased a Sony PMW-EX1, but thought I would play around with HD before investing the big bucks. What all the literature in all the manufactures of lower end HD cameras, and even higher end NL editing software like Adobe PP should be, "if you shoot it in HD, you will only be able to output it and play it to Blu-ray or other HD devices. You will not be able to convert it to a SD DVD for play on SD DVD players." If I had seen anything like that, I wouldn't have spend the money. Sony and Adobe both make it all sound very simple to the average Joe that wants to make a little better amature video. Why market and sell the stuff (HD cameras are sold in most department stores) if it can't realistically be used. I am feeling a bit screwed here.

[Oblivion_Dust]

hconant,

That HC-7 you talk about does downconvert to SD DV letterboxed. The setting is in the menu labeled "i.link conv".

[_bchil_]

The FX1 and Z1U also call it "I.LINK CONV" in the menu. I didn't have it front of me at the time. If set to "ON" it will convert HDV to DV.

-BChil

[_hconant_]

NDOR0083 you were absolutely correct about the i.link conv on the camera. Just finished a short test and I was able to capture in SD. But unfortunately I can't say it is measureably better than the HD capture and convert to SD during the export. Basically just crappy quality. All the darks turn black, and the lights wash out, and very soft, generally. Just not nearly as good as SD originals. And now you have the potential issue that your project can never be exported in HD. Perhaps that is just the nature of the conversion? Can you do a high quality conversion from HD tape to SD output DVD on high end pro equipment? Is it the camera, NLE, recording medium?

[hhansard]

I think the issue here may come down to truth in advertising.

Look, I am not in broadcast, nor do I play one on TV I will relay my joe-prosumer story and see how many can relate..

For years: shooting SD and using Adobe in post and burning DVDs with good results...

It was time for an equipment upgrade on my part: everyone is raving about HDV, Blu-ray, CS2/3, quad core, whatever so I take the plunge and spend about $30K for the whole prosumer smash

My expectation was that if I burn Blu-ray, I would get good resultsthat expectation was satisfied. HDV to Blu-ray on a 1080p monitor is just fine thank you very much, just dont tell the wife what it all costs

However, my expectation was also that I could take that same raw footage and create better quality SD DVD. Despite talking to several pros and Adobe, I cant get an Adobe-based workflow that gets results as good as my old SD days. Not even close

And this is the important point: For my budget

Its not that it cant be done, I have a friend that works in broadcast for FOX and gets HDV to SD to work, but she spent over $45K on just the post-prod hw/sw for her home business I have another who gets this to work for the BBC, but her setup costs more then my house

The big surprise for me was: How could I start with so many more pixels and yet end with so much less quality

The other surprise for me is: Why cant Adobe either put-up, shut-up or just admit that there are issues in going from HDV to SD DVD. I have been calling Adobe, writing in forums, surfing for answers and running my own experiments for weeks and no-one can seem to provide an Adobe-based workflow that actually works. and no-one from Adobe will admit to a problem.

Oh sure, you can get OK results, but if you do direct comparisons on a broadcast monitor with a broadcast source from both SD and HDV raw footage and then transcoded SD DVDs, there is simply no comparison The SD is always closer to the original. I have personally tried this

Either the HDV to SD DVD workflow exists or it does not It is just that simple. If it exists, just provide the codec, settings, profiles, etc and be done with it. If not, just say so and move on

It all comes down to: What is Acceptable Quality.

Hugh

[hhansard]

I think the issue here may come down to truth in advertising.

Look, I am not in broadcast, nor do I play one on TV I will relay my joe-prosumer story and see how many can relate..

For years: shooting SD and using Adobe in post and burning DVDs with good results...

It was time for an equipment upgrade on my part: everyone is raving about HDV, Blu-ray, CS2/3, quad core, whatever so I take the plunge and spend about $30K for the whole prosumer smash

My expectation was that if I burn Blu-ray, I would get good resultsthat expectation was satisfied. HDV to Blu-ray on a 1080p monitor is just fine thank you very much, just dont tell the wife what it all costs

However, my expectation was also that I could take that same raw footage and create better quality SD DVD. Despite talking to several pros and Adobe, I cant get an Adobe-based workflow that gets results as good as my old SD days. Not even close

And this is the important point: For my budget

Its not that it cant be done, I have a friend that works in broadcast for FOX and gets HDV to SD to work, but she spent over $45K on just the post-prod hw/sw for her home business I have another who gets this to work for the BBC, but her setup costs more then my house

The big surprise for me was: How could I start with so many more pixels and yet end with so much less quality Look, I am not looking for 24x1080p here, just results equaual to my $500 sony handycam...

The other surprise for me is: Why cant Adobe either put-up, shut-up or just admit that there are issues in going from HDV to SD DVD. I have been calling Adobe, writing in forums, surfing for answers and running my own experiments for weeks and no-one can seem to provide an Adobe-based workflow that actually works. and no-one from Adobe will admit to a problem.

Oh sure, you can get OK results, but if you do direct comparisons on a broadcast monitor with a broadcast source from both SD and HDV raw footage and then transcoded SD DVDs, there is simply no comparison The SD is always closer to the original. I have personally tried this

Either the HDV to SD DVD workflow exists or it does not It is just that simple. If it exists, just provide the codec, settings, profiles, etc and be done with it. If not, just say so and move on

It all comes down to: What is Acceptable Quality.

Hugh

[creig_bryan-mUOxt4]

This is not a case of
i Good
Grief, so Charlie Brown needn't apply.

Still, there are reasons for these roadblocks to be in place.
The first company with the incentive (and the wherewithal) to remove them wins the prize.
What's the incentive?
What's the prize worth?

Keep Smiling

[hhansard]

BChil: your point is well taken, most folks who use entirly
Adobe-based solutions are not pros. I freely admit it, I am just hacking around. The point is that a consumer can spend $30K on a system and you can't get as good results as they did 5 years ago with a $500 handycam and a $2000 postprod setup...and if you go through Adobe's marketing literature, product documentation, knowledgebase, technical support or white-papers, there is no mention of this little issue...

Creig: I really dont understand the Good Grief reference, so I dont want to misinterpret the post. But I will give my 2c as to the prize: consumer and prosumer market sales.

Look, the pros know how to solve the problems In the past week I have spoken to 2 broadcast pros, folks who make films for Discovery, National Geographic and the BBC and are broadcast pros for FOX and CNN. I spoke to one semi-pro who films for National Geographic. They tell me that I am wasting my time unless I spend vast sums to go from HDV to SD DVD I am already into this for over $30K and they tell me I am missing a zero

Consumer and prosumer market is the right cycle for equipment upgrades at this point everyone is screaming small-frame HDV cameras as loud as they can Just drop into B&H sometime and wander over to the video area This is 70% consumer, 28% prosumer and 2% broadcast

I dont pretend to know the economics of the prosumer and low-end pro market, but I bet equipment sales have a fairly steep up-take curve when technology changes, then rapidly falling sales curve once the initial purchase cycle is complete. This market is small, the semi-pro market is forced to make changes when the technology changes, semi-pros make a one-time equipment purchases then uses their gear for as long and hard as they can, then they e-bay it. I mean, how many $175K broadcast cameras can Sony sell a year? After all the pros have them the sales curve must start to taper off, rapidly Also the semi-pro post prod houses do the same thing... on-time purchases when the technology changes, depreciate the assets over 5 years...

The consumer market is vast and a continuous stream of gear is sold Again, just drop by B&H for a look If it really is the case that you cant make DVDs from HDV sources that look as good as a $500 handycam, and this knowledge becomes wide spread, then I think it will have a negative impact on sales throughout the industry.

The video community is not that large and the internet reaches all People talk. At this point I am telling everyone I know not up upgrade their DV cameras to HDV because I have been told by the pros that there is no point.

Again, you can get OK results, but if you do direct comparisons on a broadcast monitor with a broadcast source from both SD and HDV raw footage and then transcoded SD DVDs using an all Adobe-based workflow, then there is simply no comparison The SD is always closer to the original. I have personally tried this I have tried almost every combination of field-options, frame options, de-interlacing, progressive output and codec that I can find. Still no-joy.

To really see if I was on to something or just being too-picky, I did an experiment yesterday I cut a DVD, then drove into town to our local studio photographer I asked him to go me a favor and play the DVD to his 2-person staff.. I did not say a thing. Both of the staff members basically said, cool footage, but one got up and started to fiddle with the monitor He saw all these interlacing artifacts and thought that their must be something wrong with the monitor.

Either an Adobe-based HDV to SD DVD workflow exists or it does not We are talking comsumer and prosumer here. I have been told by my pro and semi-pro friends what they use, and it is not an Adobe or Apple workflow... They play in a different league

The consumer/prosumer doesnt expect 1080x24p, but the results have to look as a 5-year-old handycam or whats the point? It is just that simple.

Adobe: If a workflow exists, just say so; provide details: the codec, settings, profiles, etc and be done with it. It is in your best interest to tell your customers If the workflow does not exist, just say so After all, folks are willing to spend $$$ on this stuff, so if we all need to by some 3rd party software for transcoding, rendering or whatever, then we'll do it. If we have to send our final tapes to a post-pro shop and just pay them for the final master, then provide a list of of shops that you would recomend...

I have called Adobe 3 times in the past month and could not get a decent answer. I know Adobe monitors this forum, but they have been silent on this topic. Either they know there is a problem, or they dont.

What is Acceptable Quality?

Hugh

[_hconant_]

Below is a solution posted in another thread "HD to SD DVD", which was written by Dan Isaacs. I haven't tried it, but it sounds in depth,
Hi --

Although I have never tried to convert a final Premiere project from HD -> SD DVD, I convert footage from HD to SD all the time.

From my experience, I am not surprised by your poor results. I NEVER use Adobe products for this purpose.

There are a few different problems that may arise here:

1.) Interlaced processing: The video must be deinterlaced before it is scaled down. Premiere may not be doing this and even if it is, Premiere's deinterlacing is absolutely horrible. After scaling, it must be re-interlaced (unless progressive output is your goal).

2.) Scaling algorithmn: Premiere probably does not use a very high quality scaling algorithm for resizing. It is best to ensure that Bicubic (or Lanczos, better yet) is being used.

3.) Vertical Filtering: You may experience flickering on interlaced monitors if sharp scaling (such as Lanczos) is used. It is a good idea to experiment with a slight vertical blur either before or afer scaling to reduce flicker.

4.) Aspect ratio conversion: Historically, Adobe's formulas for aspect ratio conversion are WRONG. This may result is slight stretching / squeezing of the final video.

5.) Luminance Levels / legal colors: HDV and DV footage allow super-whites which DVD should not contain. Furthermore, color adjustments and graphics in your Premiere project may cause colors and luminance to exceed the legal range. You must make sure this is handled correctly.

6.) Color matrix: Your HDV footage is Rec.709 -- as is the standard for DVD. Make sure that your video is not being unintentionally converted to CCIR 601 colors. It is also good to know whether unnecessary YUV -> RGB -> YUV conversions are taking place. This can degrade the quality and cause funky and unpredicatable color.

Try frameserving it from Premiere with the DebugMode frameserver -- a great free tool.

You can use AviSynth (also free) to process the video exactly as you want.

That being done, you can use VirtualDub and render to a lossless .AVI and feed that into your MPEG2 encoder (Premiere) or -- get an encoder such as TMPEG or CCE that can read AviSynth scripts directly.

There's a bit of research required, but all the tools are free. Trust me, you won't be disappointed with the final result.

http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~f76998/video/conversion/

http://www.debugmode.com/frameserver/
http://avisynth.org
http://virtualdub.org/

[hhansard]

Hconant: You are the Man ! And thank you Dan !

Ill try this today. and after browsing the information, maybe tonight, tomorrow

I will post results

Now here is the 64$ question. Assuming I complete the process described, I will end-up with all new [scaled down] source files to import into premiere. How do I get it back in premiere [where I have over a hundred hours of edited timeline investment] and not loose my edits? I started with 17hrs of raw HDV and edited-it down to a usable 30 minutes, I would like to avoid re-editing

If you can answer that, Ill send you a Christmas card

Thanks,

Hugh

[hhansard]

I'm sorry, I should have been more clear...

I have unfortunatly already created an SD project and inported all my HDV assets in and allowed PP to scale them... Then spend 100s of hours editing the assets... So I'm stuck with what I have...

It looks like if I had an HDV project I could use framesaver, et all. to make this work...

So at this point, I want to reserve my timeline, edits, titles etc, but get the vid in the SD format... I can't change the project format.

Can I do a seperate conversion outside of my project and import / replace the assets and not loosing all my work?

Thanks, Hugh

[Oblivion_Dust]

Footage from a Sony HVR-Z1U, HC-7. HDV 1080i project. Exported to Encore. Type: DVD SL. Quality: 5. Fields: none (Progressive). Widescreen 16:9. CBR 8 Mbps. Deinterlace.
Watching it right now. Guess what, it looks great. Maybe I'm just working with better looking material.

[_hconant_]

I didn't have a lot of luck with DebugMode. Every movie I tried to export using it had all black for video. However, I made some significant headway as a result of the experiment. This is what I have done so far which yielded MUCH better color quality, no striping, no pixilation or drops. Still a bit soft, but 1000% better.

From your PP and your captured HD footage in the time line...
File > Export > Movie >
In the Export Movie box that pops up that wants you to enter a file name for save to, there is a "Settings" button in the bottom right of the window. Select it. An "Export Movie Settings" window opens. Then use these settings (or at least I did)
General:
Microsoft AVI (Not Microsoft DV AVI)
Range: Entire sequence
Check: Export video
Check: Export audio
Check: Add to Project (see notes further down, you may or may not want to use this option)
Video:
Compressor: Uncompressed UYVY 422 8 bit
Color Depth: Millions of colors
Pixel Aspect Ratio: D1/DV NTSC (0.9)
Keyframe:
Bitdepth: Maximum
Fields: Check the box for Deinterlace
Click OK

Now, or at least after putting in a file name, click Save. It will render or otherwise process the "movie" and put it into your PP project as a *.avi file. In my case I was just using a little 60 second clip for testing so processing doesn't take long. So I clearing the original mpg clip from the time line, then dragged the new *.avi file to the time line. Then use the routine File > Export > Encore, using the SD DVD settings and let it go. The DVD burned with much better quality, as I mentioned. I think this could be refined a bit, but for me has yielded the best quality and I think I would say "acceptable". The size seems off, so I am going to try to change settings to improve this. I think the PAR (pixel aspect ratio) should probably be changed to square, or maybe NTSC widescreen (1.2).

I am not sure why this works but it does. Maybe something to do with the deinterlacing, or uncompressed? It would sure be nice to just have a simple preset to select and not have to go through this.

Also, since I had no effects I dont know if it will work with transitions, still photos or other effects. I hope it will.

But let me know what you (anyone) thinks.

[_hconant_]

Ndor0083. I just read your post after I sent my long diatribe. Going to try your method now (If I have any DVDs left !!)

[_hconant_]

NDOR0083, I just tried your methode. It worked real good. And lot's simpler than mine.

[_tlc51369_]

>(If I have any DVDs left !!)

Why don't you use re-writables?

[_hconant_]

It was sort of a joke, but thanks for your thought.

[Andy Urtu]

Cineform. Use Cineform to take your HDV footage into the HIGH Quality cinform 4:2:2 intermediate .avi file. Cineform can do the scaling/resizing,field dominance etc by using their HD Link utility. It captures and/or resizes.

Give it a try. They offer a 15 day free trial.

I agree, an All Adobe workflow does not work the best.

[_Craig_IAFF_]

I have been shooting with a Canon XH-A1. I let the camera down convert the high def footage to SD while I capture in Premiere. Results have been great. As we've all found out, don't let Premiere convert for you.

[_tlc51369_]

>I let the camera down convert the high def footage to SD while I capture in Premiere.

Then you are stuck in the future when you wished you would have edited in HDV. Your whole edit will be in SD. What's the point of using an HDV camera?

[_hconant_]

There has been a few comments regarding HDV not being an appropriate format for high definition editing, and that only the expensive pro systems can adequately do that. Assuming that PP is at the very least pro-sumer, is it safe to say that if you were to be using a Sony EX-1, XDCAM, or other proformat high def format equipment, that you would seamlessly be able to capture it to PP and export it to SD or anything else you wish? Or is it actually PP and the like of FC and Vegas or any other $1k editing software that is the problem. What hardware/software is needed to be able to edit high definition video and maintain its original (or close to it) quality?

[_Craig_IAFF_]

tlc51369 I wouldn't have wished I edited in HD as the client has requested SD as their final video format. The point of using an HD camera is that the XH-A1 produces great results from high def to SD.

[_HR_Crystal_]

My two cents here:

Export a SD-MPEG-2 at 29.97 through the adobe media encoder, download the free author suite (the demo works just fine) at www.tmpgenc.com (It'll redirect). It doesn't screw with your settings or your file like encore does - and it does have quite a nice set of tools for creating menus to any specification.

Encore is like windows vista (In my opinion) so much overhead it's pointless and aggrevating! and 9/10 times, you spend more time fighting it, then you do using it. Go simple.